AJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the Petitioner has challenged an order dated 27.10.2009 passed by the Appellate Authority, as contained in Annexure-9, by which on the complaint of Respondent No. 11, the appointment of the Petitioners has been cancelled and the Respondent No. 11 has been directed to be appointed.

(2.) From the impugned order, it appears that on receipt of the complaint the Block Development Officer had asked the Labour Enforcement Office to enquire and submit his report. The Labour Enforcement Officer submitted the report which showed that certain irregularities had been committed in the selection and preparation of the counselling register. On the basis of the said report, the Appellate Authority came to a conclusion that the counselling had become doubtful. Hence, orders were passed cancelling the appointment of Petitioner and for appointment of the Respondent.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that if the counselling was held as illegal and manipulated the entire selection process had to go and fresh counselling had to be held. By no stretch of imagination the Appellate Authority could direct the appointment of the Respondent. He further submits that the Appellate Authority has not itself examined the original records and has passed orders only on the basis of the said report of the Labour Enforcement Officer in which allegation was of signature of all the candidates on the counselling register in one pen.